If the AMGs only reticle option is the EBR-9 I would have to pass anyway. Just personally not a fan of it and have found it difficult to read at a glance. It also faces the same crowded center issue as the original NX8 reticle.
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Rifle Scopes Vortex AMG 1-10 LPVO
- Thread starter Secant
- Start date
You probably already know this but, I’ve found the G3 is particularly fussy about needing the diopter set perfectly for optimal performance.
I think Ilya cannot reveal much yet. I like my short dot dual thus far, and I am very happy that I purchased one despite the price. My S&B short dot dual has great glass, no distortion up close and far away, easy to use adjustments, and the footprint is frankly not that bad compared to other systems out there.
It would appear from the Euro Optic listing that the new Vortex AMG 1-10x is a front focal plane scope using a 1x circle reticle up front that disappears at higher mags. It does not appear to be dual focal plane like the S&B. I’m not sure why they want $4k then for it then unless the short tube and glass is very difficult to manufacture and assemble.
We need to wait until we have trigger time behind the new Vortex AMG before rendering a verdict.
It would appear from the Euro Optic listing that the new Vortex AMG 1-10x is a front focal plane scope using a 1x circle reticle up front that disappears at higher mags. It does not appear to be dual focal plane like the S&B. I’m not sure why they want $4k then for it then unless the short tube and glass is very difficult to manufacture and assemble.
We need to wait until we have trigger time behind the new Vortex AMG before rendering a verdict.
Daniel Defense M4A1 RIII 5.56mm NATO 14.5" P&W Bbl Rifle with Vortex AMG 1-10x24 FFP EBR-9 Super Short Scope & Reptilia Mount (EuroOptic Exclusive)
Daniel Defense M4A1 RIII 5.56mm NATO 14.5" P&W Bbl Rifle with Vortex AMG 1-10x24 FFP EBR-9 Super Short Scope & Reptilia Mount (EuroOptic Exclusive) For Sale
I did I just can’t seem to get it quite right, I’ll probably give it a bit more time but if I can’t get it I’m probably just going to sell it and pick up another 2.5-20 NX8.
Anyone who says the dual cc is hot garbage ( when in reality it IS the best lpvo you can buy bar none) has serious brain damage and should go back to the kiddie table with their helmet.
Can I ask at what magnification and distance you are seeing this? We might be able to tweak some things to get the scope set up to work better for what you are doing with it. This would involve sending the scope to me.
Best Regards
Scott
If the dang thing is for sale publicly, albeit in a package of only 50 units, nothing should be secret anymore.
Hey! Wait a second! You chime in on this thread and you fail to tell us more about this new optic! That is against the law.
What do you want to know? I'll certainly answer whatever questions I can.
Everything! Call Frank up and have him do a full video and review ASAP.
Eyebox, video of the reticle on 1x vs 4-10x. Illumination. etc etc
Please tell me you guys will be dropping a new AMG, Razor, or PST3 that’ll fill that crossover market void. FFP, 2.5-15ish, usable reticle on low mag(donut or something) illuminated, forgiving parallax, decent fov, under 30oz…. Any chance?
Will you be selling the optic to the general public in the near future?
Just these 50 cerakoted scopes in the DD package deal for now and foreseeable future.
Booo booo I say. Thank you for the response and hope your Christmas is a good one.
The reticle is the same mrad reticle that's in our gen 3 1-10. Since it's the same configuration scope it will present the same.
Last edited:
As someone who has been bitten by the "never to be sold again" promise, I would definitely advise to tell the current buyers either that there is possibility of a general public sale at later date, or else stick to your guns and never offer them again. I think you create a fair amount of issues with both future and past buyers if you don't choose one or the other. (And I am not saying that you are, just offering my 2 cents which is worth what you paid for it)
He said “foreseeable future”. A buyer should not expect it to be limited to just these. He didn’t say “never to be sold again”. The possibility is open for future sales. They’ll still sell all 50 though.
It would be foolish for Vortex to say definitively that they will sell them in the future. Not until they have it lined up and ready to go live. All sorts of things could happen that make it no longer possible and then they’re the asshole who said they would sell them again, but can’t.
I think his answer was reasonable and none of the buyers will think definitively that they have a super exclusive thing that will never be for sale again.
2021 Dodge Durango Hellcat Owners Sue Over New 2023 Durango Hellcat
Dodge surprised fans by announcing the Durango Hellcat is back for 2023. But some owners of the 2021 Durango Hellcat aren't happy about it.
jalopnik.com
It's a cross industry failing of many.
Dumbest lawsuit ever. What a surprise, company creates improved product 3 years after original release. Bunch of salty losers.2021 Dodge Durango Hellcat Owners Sue Over New 2023 Durango Hellcat
Dodge surprised fans by announcing the Durango Hellcat is back for 2023. But some owners of the 2021 Durango Hellcat aren't happy about it.
It's a cross industry failing of many.
I bought one of the 50 because I’m wanting to do a clone of the KAC KS-1/L403A1 rifles as recently adopted by the RMC. It could be years but I assume the KS-1 will eventually be sold to civilians, even if they don’t have dimpled barrels when they release, making this optic the make-or-break piece of the puzzle. This is by far the most expensive scope I’ve bought, and the next nicest glass I’ve owned to compare it to would be Elcans and acogs. I’m really not even sure if I fully buy into the idea of using a 1-10 on a 13.7” AR, but I love KAC and I think it’s pretty cool that an American rifle and optic have been adopted by the RMC. I’d love to have one of the Voodoo-S thermals they’re buying as well but unless I find a screaming deal on a used one my skeet-IR L will have to stand in.
If I wanted to send mine to a Guntuber for a review, who is the most trusted and objective optics reviewer on YouTube?
If I wanted to send mine to a Guntuber for a review, who is the most trusted and objective optics reviewer on YouTube?
bumping this question for @Scott_at_Vortex
would love something in the 3-18x for gas guns or hunting rifles and then 5-30x range for bolt guns
I personally really like the videos C_DOES puts out, but I know he is moving right now, so who knows when he will be able to get to it.
Perhaps you might want to send the optic to one of our resident experts for review? @Glassaholic has been doing very good work here for a long time. I will also love to see @koshkin review the optic but I don't know if the NDAs he has signed with Vortex will prevent him from revieweing the optic.
I do not think there are any NDAs that would prevent me from discussing a commercially available optic.
If Vortex ever releases these scopes for sale beyond the 50 that Eurooptic has, I will certainly do a review. I have some top level familiarity with these and once in broad release they would be worth reviewing.
It is hard to overestimate how tricky it is to make an optic that short with a 10x erector, while retaining good FOV and overall performance.
The moment you start adding other pieces to the system, that short overall length makes all the difference in the world.
ILya
The gen3 has a lot of compromises (i sold mine after 6 months), i can only imagine the shorter version.
I'm not sure. It was just in his year-end update video that he had bought a house and was moving. Unfortunately, that means no more living room reference, which SUCKS because the different objects at different ranges were awesome to have as a reference. He said he hopes to figure out something similar at or near his new place, but it would probably be a few months before any major updates or video drops.
FINALLY!!! Project Eleanor is in my hands
Initial impressions:
-Not forgiving eye box at all, very sensitive, even at 1x you get about 3/4” in all directions from center before you are staring into the black abyss. Once you get your cheek weld set and repeatable it’s like any other LPVO IMO.
-Eye relief change with magnification change (as stated by multiple other people who know a guy who tried it) is not an issue if set properly from the get go. I think this may have been confused for the tight eye box on a rifle and scope that wasn’t theirs, not the change in eye relief during magnification. I set mine at 6x magnification and have been good to go up to 10x with minor adjustment to the already tight eye box. Just need to get good repeatable cheek weld and it’s a non issue, or at least a very minor issue.
-Glass quality is fantastic, clear, and bright.
-Edge distortion and fisheye is very very good. I tried to capture this in picture but it’s hard with a phone. Used the edge of my monitor at work and moved it in an out of the edge of the lens. Lines up perfectly inside and outside of the scope with no bending of the straight line as best as I could tell. I tried to capture this on my phone as seen below but the lines didn't lline up like they did in my eyes and in real life. The picture is confusing because it looks off but in real life they lined up perfectly and the edge of the monitor did not have any noticeable bending from top to bottom.
-Reticle brightness is daylight bright. Brightest vortex I have actually ever seen. You can see the flare in the picture caused by it being so bright.
-The big win here for me is form factor and weight. The size and weight to performance is top notch in my opinion.
Overall I actually really like this thing. As with everything you have trade offs. For me the size and weight were key. You would really need to compare this to the March to make a fair assessment. In my opinion the reticle is the big win and the reason to go with this over a March...in my opinion. I will say this. Even though I had to buy a DD M4A1 RIII to get it I am not too upset. I will just sell that to recoupe some funds so I can put a MAWL on this rifle eventually.
Fire away with any questions you may have and I will do my best to answer them.
Initial impressions:
-Not forgiving eye box at all, very sensitive, even at 1x you get about 3/4” in all directions from center before you are staring into the black abyss. Once you get your cheek weld set and repeatable it’s like any other LPVO IMO.
-Eye relief change with magnification change (as stated by multiple other people who know a guy who tried it) is not an issue if set properly from the get go. I think this may have been confused for the tight eye box on a rifle and scope that wasn’t theirs, not the change in eye relief during magnification. I set mine at 6x magnification and have been good to go up to 10x with minor adjustment to the already tight eye box. Just need to get good repeatable cheek weld and it’s a non issue, or at least a very minor issue.
-Glass quality is fantastic, clear, and bright.
-Edge distortion and fisheye is very very good. I tried to capture this in picture but it’s hard with a phone. Used the edge of my monitor at work and moved it in an out of the edge of the lens. Lines up perfectly inside and outside of the scope with no bending of the straight line as best as I could tell. I tried to capture this on my phone as seen below but the lines didn't lline up like they did in my eyes and in real life. The picture is confusing because it looks off but in real life they lined up perfectly and the edge of the monitor did not have any noticeable bending from top to bottom.
-Reticle brightness is daylight bright. Brightest vortex I have actually ever seen. You can see the flare in the picture caused by it being so bright.
-The big win here for me is form factor and weight. The size and weight to performance is top notch in my opinion.
Overall I actually really like this thing. As with everything you have trade offs. For me the size and weight were key. You would really need to compare this to the March to make a fair assessment. In my opinion the reticle is the big win and the reason to go with this over a March...in my opinion. I will say this. Even though I had to buy a DD M4A1 RIII to get it I am not too upset. I will just sell that to recoupe some funds so I can put a MAWL on this rifle eventually.
Fire away with any questions you may have and I will do my best to answer them.
Attachments
This was actually so hard to do with no camera mount and no bipod at 10x, haha. Neighbors were walking past me like WTF! Haha
Attachments
I'm amazed you didn't get the police called on you with you pointing a rifle around in a neighborhood!
This definitely looks better than a Gen III based on the videos from C_DOES:
To me, it looks like there is less CA and better edge to edge clarity. While I'm far too poor to buy one of these optics now, it boads well for future releases as the newer tech trickles down to us peasants. Thanks for the image!
It would be sorta funny to post reticle pics with inappropriate things in the background (grannies, your naked reflection, etc), esp with no explanation.
Like a parody “show me reticles” reticle thread lol.
Haha everybody knows me and that I am a gun nut but it was still funny to see people double take. 1 guy actually came up and was raving about the new rifle/optic and how he wanted one. Either way I would say the edge to edge clarity is slightly better. CA is pretty hard to see with only a 10x scope. If this had even slight CA I would be on the phone with Vortex...especially at this price point.
Hey, being well-known in the community can be a good thing! That's cool though.
As far as CA, that's why I linked a few pictures from his G3 review. At least to me, it appears that the G3 does, in fact, have CA, which is why it's nice to see that this one doesn't.
Clarity is more difficult to tell, but good to know from your perspective too.
I mean as far as overall feel of the optic, coming from a Gen 3 this definitely feels like an upgrade in quality and a downgrade is size and weight. This is exactly what I was going for and I am happy I made the purchase...as expensive as it was. I am by no means an optic snob but the only real complaint I have is the tighter eye box. That to me is the only win for the Gen 3 and frankly it is to be expected due to the size savings.
Looks really nice. Thank you for pictures.
I think the reticle design looks nice to me. I'm not sure why people complain about the Vortex Gen 3 reticle design.
If the eye box is tight for this optic, given its shorter length, that is a no can do for me with my crap eyes and eye sight....especially if I am shooting with my safety glasses as opposed to wearing contact lenses with normal Wiley-X eye wear. I will stick with my S&B Short Dot Dual.
Anyhow, it would be cool if Vortex can improve upon and shorten the length of their 1-6x model. Imagine better performance in a shorter package but the same large eye box.
I think the reticle design looks nice to me. I'm not sure why people complain about the Vortex Gen 3 reticle design.
If the eye box is tight for this optic, given its shorter length, that is a no can do for me with my crap eyes and eye sight....especially if I am shooting with my safety glasses as opposed to wearing contact lenses with normal Wiley-X eye wear. I will stick with my S&B Short Dot Dual.
Anyhow, it would be cool if Vortex can improve upon and shorten the length of their 1-6x model. Imagine better performance in a shorter package but the same large eye box.
A couple of comments:
1) you can not evaluate image quality based on random through the scope pictures on the internet. At least not if you want any actionable data. They exist to show you what the reticle looks like and give you an idea of the FOV. Anything else you think you are getting out of it is pure fantasy.
2) you can not compare through the scope pictures taken by different people with different cameras in different locations at different times. It is not even apples and oranges. It is kinda like comparing hippos to used condoms.
It is possible to take through the scope pictures that give a somewhat reasonable representation of real image quality, but it is quite difficult. I have never seen anyone on Youtube do that. Noone. Not a single person.
You have to be very careful trying to judge CA based on a through the scope picture. All modern camera try to correct for it and they do it based on scene analysis which is all over the place. If the scope eyepiece and what you are looking at are not perfectly adjusted to the camera, it is very easy to see CA where there is none. Unless the camera automatically subtracts it out. Which it sometimes does and sometimes does not. Sometimes it fucks it up and the image looks like it has more CA.
On top of that, your eye sees things in a somewhat different way than cameras do, so it is not all that representative most of the time.
I can take any scope you want and take pictures through it on the same day looking at the same thing and set it up to look like it has lots of CA, no matter how nice of a scope it is.
Same goes for every other aspect of image quality. I have seen various Youtubers claim that they try to control for conditions and all that. I've never been able to find one who can tell his ass from an elbow when it comes to that. And I've looked.
Setting up a camera behind a scope just right is a major pain in the ass. For my dayjob, one of the things we make is a test system for riflescopes where there is a camera looking into the eyepiece. Getting that set up just right for consistent and verifiable measurements is not straightforward. I have a setup in my house that is a simplified version of that (to look at tracking, etc). Every time I swap scopes, it is a pain in the ass to get it all lined up again and I am not even trying to get the best image quality, just proper alignment.
As far as the Shorty AMG goes, it is a very nice scope and I expect it to do well. To re-iterate: making a high quality scope that short is a spectacular pain in the neck. Vortex pulled it off very well, I think.
ILya
1) you can not evaluate image quality based on random through the scope pictures on the internet. At least not if you want any actionable data. They exist to show you what the reticle looks like and give you an idea of the FOV. Anything else you think you are getting out of it is pure fantasy.
2) you can not compare through the scope pictures taken by different people with different cameras in different locations at different times. It is not even apples and oranges. It is kinda like comparing hippos to used condoms.
It is possible to take through the scope pictures that give a somewhat reasonable representation of real image quality, but it is quite difficult. I have never seen anyone on Youtube do that. Noone. Not a single person.
You have to be very careful trying to judge CA based on a through the scope picture. All modern camera try to correct for it and they do it based on scene analysis which is all over the place. If the scope eyepiece and what you are looking at are not perfectly adjusted to the camera, it is very easy to see CA where there is none. Unless the camera automatically subtracts it out. Which it sometimes does and sometimes does not. Sometimes it fucks it up and the image looks like it has more CA.
On top of that, your eye sees things in a somewhat different way than cameras do, so it is not all that representative most of the time.
I can take any scope you want and take pictures through it on the same day looking at the same thing and set it up to look like it has lots of CA, no matter how nice of a scope it is.
Same goes for every other aspect of image quality. I have seen various Youtubers claim that they try to control for conditions and all that. I've never been able to find one who can tell his ass from an elbow when it comes to that. And I've looked.
Setting up a camera behind a scope just right is a major pain in the ass. For my dayjob, one of the things we make is a test system for riflescopes where there is a camera looking into the eyepiece. Getting that set up just right for consistent and verifiable measurements is not straightforward. I have a setup in my house that is a simplified version of that (to look at tracking, etc). Every time I swap scopes, it is a pain in the ass to get it all lined up again and I am not even trying to get the best image quality, just proper alignment.
As far as the Shorty AMG goes, it is a very nice scope and I expect it to do well. To re-iterate: making a high quality scope that short is a spectacular pain in the neck. Vortex pulled it off very well, I think.
ILya
My samsung s8 tends to film CA true to my eye. YMMV, but in my review vids, what I see on screen is what I saw with my eyes, re CA.
I dont think this will do very well at all. Think about nx8 1-8. What is the first thing lpvo enjoyers talk about? Now attach it to a lesser reptutation company, almost double the price….
Anyone with right mind wouldn’t but this at the price point it is proposed.
Anyone with right mind wouldn’t but this at the price point it is proposed.
Similar threads
